Still, Dereser's idea
that "Daniel may have written his book in Greek at Babylon with all the
additions" (quoted by Bissell, p. 444) seems most unlikely, and could
hardly have been advanced except under the necessity of supporting the
Roman view of the book.
Theodotion's version, so far as concerns the locality where it
originated, shares the obscurity which hangs over much of Theodotion's
personal life. Ephesus may be suggested, for Iren?¦us (III. xxiii.)
styles him ??? ??™?†????????‚; though Epiphanius calls him ? ?????„???????‚ (_D.C.B._
art. _Hexapla_, p. 22a). The latter author is, for the most part, the
less accurate of the two. In _De Mensuris, etc._, XVII. he states that
??'s version was issued in the second Commodus' reign, 180--192,
"obviously too late."[14] The pre-Theodotionic version which ?? is thought
to have used may of course have been an Alexandrian production; but at
present little is known of it.
That Theodotion had some earlier rendering, besides the LXX as his
basis, the quotations in Rev.
Pages:
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51